Notemigonus crysoleucas RAFIHESQUE; CYPRINIDAE
Nothobranchius guentheri (PFEFFER): CYPRINODONTIDAE
Noturus insignis (RICHARDSON): ICTALDRIDAE
Odontesthes bonariensis (CUVIER and VAUNCIENNES): ATHERINIDAE
Oncorhynchus gorbuscha (WALBAUM): SALMONIDAE
Oncorhynchus keta (WALBAUM): SALMONIDAE
Oncorhynchus kisutch (WALBAUM): SALMON IDAE
Oncorhynchus masou BREVOORT: SALMONIDAE
Oncorhynchus nerka WALBAUM: SALMONIDAE
Oncorhynchus rhodurus (JORDAN and HACGREGOR): SALMONIDAE
Oncorhynchus tshawytscha (WALBAUM): SALMONIDAE
Opsariichthys uncirostris amurensis BERG: CYPRINIDAE
Orconectes limosus RAFINESQUE: CRUSTACEA; ASTACIDAE
Oreochromis andersoni CAST: CICHLIDAE
Oreochromis aureus (STEINDACHNER): CICHLIDAE
Oreochromis esculentus (GRAHAM): CICHLIDAE
Oreochromis leucostictus (TREWAVAS): CICHLIDAE
Oreochromis macrochir (BOULENGER): CICHLIDAE
Oreochromis mortimeri (TREWAVAS): CICHLIDAE
Oreochromis mossambicus (PETERS): CICHLIDAE
Oreochromis niloticus L.: CICHLIDAE
Oreochromis niloticus × O. mossambicus hybrid 'Red Tilapia': CICHLIDAE
Oreochromis shiranus BOULENGER: CICHLIDAE
Oreochromis spilurus (GUNTHER); CICHLIDAE
Oreochromis urolepis hornorum (TREWAVAS): CICHLIDAE
Oreochromis sp. Native range: Africa
Orthodon microlepidotus (AYRES): CYPRINIDAE
Oryzias latipes (TEMMINCK and SCHLEGEL): ORYZIATIDAE
Osphronemus gouramy (LACEPEDE): OSPHRONEMIBAE
Native range: Atlantic slope of N. America from Maritime Provinces to Florida.
The golden shiner is extremely popular as an ornamental species and for bait. As such it has been distributed widely through the U.S. and Canada. Its range has also been extended to the South by introductions to Mexico.
|
South and Central America | ||
|
To: Mexico |
From: Unknown |
Year: 1973 |
|
Reason: Release of bait fish |
Reproducing: Artificially | |
Native range: East Africa
A small tropical species which has achieved moderate success in the aquarium fish trade. The species is one of a group of so called 'annual fishes' which have diapausing eggs which can survive seasonal droughts and even complete desiccation of the water body in which they live. The first rains cause rapid hatching and the colonization of the renewed water body.
|
Oceania | ||
|
To: Hawaii |
From: Unknown |
Year: 1967 |
|
Reason: Ornament |
Reproducing: Unknown |
|
|
Comments: The fate of this introduction is uncertain. | ||
Native range: Eastern United States
The margined madtom is a small (9 cm) temperate species with a preference for clearwater streams with moderate current.
|
North America | ||
|
To: Canada |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1971 |
|
Reason: Release from a bait bucket |
Reproducing: Uncertain | |
|
Comments: A few individuals have been found in Quebec where the species is probably established. The introduction represents an extension of the natural range northwards. | ||
Native range: Southern Argentina and Rio de la Plata
The 'pejerrey', a cool water predator is highly prized for the quality of its flesh. The fish is predominantly lacustrine but breeds in affluent rivers. It was Introduced into L. Nemi in Italy where it has thrived and formed the basis for a small fishery. Its introduction into L. Titicaca has been more controversial as the introduction of O. bonariensis together with Salmo gairdneri, has had an impact on the native species flocks. Most of the species have persisted in the presence of the introduced predators but one Orestias cuvieri has not been seen for 20 years and others, O. pentlandii, Trichomycterus rivulatus and T. dispar have declined considerably in abundance. The decline is possibly not simply due to competition or predation by the introduced species, of which S. gairdneri is probably the most serious, but also to overfishing and environmentally unsound practices (Hanek, 1982). The native species flock did not support a rich fishery whereas the fisheries now are estimated to have a potential of 75-150 000 t, actual catches being about 6 000 t in Peruvian waters.
|
Africa | ||
|
To: Morocco |
From: Argentina |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Unknown |
|
|
Comments: Not known (Jhingran and Gopalakrishnan, 1974). | ||
|
Asia | ||
|
To: Japan |
From: Argentina |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Not known |
|
|
Europe | ||
|
To: Italy |
From: Argentina |
Year: 1970-75 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture and fisheries |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
Comments: Very successful in L. Nemi. | ||
|
South and Central America | ||
|
To: Bolivia |
From: Argentina |
Year: 1945, 1962 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture, sport |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
Comments: Has damaged native Orestias populations: Migrated from original introduction site to R. Desaguadero, L. Poopo and L. Titicaca. | ||
|
To: Brazil |
From: Argentina |
Year: 1945 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Unknown |
|
|
To: Chile |
From: Argentina |
Year: 1940-42 |
|
Reason: Food, sport, aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
Comments: Established and contributes to fishery but may have eliminated local Orestias and Trichomycterus species. | ||
|
To: Peru |
From: Argentina/Bolivia Year: 1955 | |
|
Reason: Diffusion from original site of stocking in Bolivia | ||
|
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
|
Comments: Has damaged populations of local Orestias species. | ||
Native range: Western seaboard U.S. and Canada, Eastern seaboard of Northern Asia
Originally the pink salmon was of less importance for food fisheries than the other Pacific salmons but has gained in importance since the 1940s as a commercial and sporting species. It was introduced to Newfoundland in 1958 and has established a small population on the Atlantic coast of Canada. International introductions have mainly centered firstly round the Kola Peninsula from which it has spread to other parts of Northern Europe, and to the Caspian and Black Seas, and secondly as part of the repeated attempts to establish Pacific salmon in the Southern waters of Chile and Argentina.
|
Europe | ||
|
To: Finland |
From: U.S.S.R. |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: By diffusion |
Reproducing: Not known |
|
|
Comments: Stocks introduced from Eastern to Western U.S.S.R. have diffused into Scandinavian waters. | ||
|
To: Ireland |
From: U.S.S.R./Norway |
Year: 1960s |
|
Reason: By diffusion |
Reproducing: Not known |
|
|
Comments: Stocks introduced from Eastern to Western U.S.S.R. have diffused into Scandinavian, Scottish and Irish waters. | ||
|
To: Norway |
From: U.S.S.R. |
Year: 1960s |
|
Reason: By diffusion |
Reproducing: Not known |
|
|
Comments: Stocks introduced from Eastern to Western U.S.S.R. have diffused into Scandinavian waters. | ||
|
To: U.K. |
From: U.S.S.R. |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: By diffusion |
Reproducing: Not known |
|
|
Comments: Stocks introduced from Eastern to Western U.S.S.R. have diffused into Scandinavian, Scottish and Irish waters. | ||
|
South and Central America | ||
|
To: Chile |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: To establish stocks in Southern Ocean |
Reproducing: Unknown | |
Native range: Western seaboard U.S. and Canada, Eastern seaboard Northern Asia
The chum salmon is one of the most important of the Pacific salmons for commercial fisheries in its native range. However, it has been used less for introductions than the other species. Attempts to introduce it to the North American Great Lakes failed as did those in Chile. Wore recently introductions into Northern European waters of the U.S.S.R. have apparently resulted in small populations becoming established.
|
Europe | ||
|
To: Finland |
From: U.S.S.R. |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: By diffusion |
Reproducing: Not known |
|
|
Comments: Stocks introduced from Eastern to Western U.S.S.R. have diffused into Scandinavian waters. | ||
|
South and Central America | ||
|
To: Chile |
From: Japan |
Year: 1970 + |
|
Reason: Establishment of a wild fishery |
Reproducing: Artificially | |
|
Comments: Subject of an expanding aquaculture industry in the South of the country. | ||
Native range: Western seaboard U.S. and Canada, Eastern seaboard Northern Asia
As an important commercial fish of the Pacific coast coho salmon have also been introduced into the East coast of Canada and the U.S. Populations are maintained in the Great Lakes, mainly by artificial reproduction and stocking although recently self sustaining stocks have appeared. The species has also been successfully established in Chilean waters and is maintained in Argentina by artificial propagation. Attempts to establish breeding stocks in Europe have so far met with no success although escapees from aquaculture do sometimes appear in natural waters.
|
Europe | ||
|
To: Cyprus |
From: Canada |
Year: 1974 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: No |
|
|
To: France |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1974 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Species has appeared in rivers following accidental escape from ponds. | ||
|
To: Germany F.R. |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1974 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: No |
|
|
To: Greece |
From: Unknown |
Year: |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: No |
|
|
To: Italy |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1973 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: No |
|
|
To: Netherlands |
From: Unknown |
Year: 1982 |
|
Reason: Diffusion of stocks from elsewhere |
Reproducing: No | |
|
Comments: Specimens captured probably originated from private releases made in the Somme Estuary, France (Groot,1985). | ||
|
South and Central America | ||
|
To: Argentina |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1904 |
|
Reason: to fill a vacant niche |
Reproducing: Artificially | |
|
To: Chile |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1930, 1970+ |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Subject of a rapidly expanding aquaculture industry in the region of Chiloe and Lake Llanqihue. | ||
Native range: Northern Japan and Korea
The masou salmon is an important commercial fish of Eastern Asia. Attempts at introduction of the species have been few and unsuccessful.
|
North America | ||
|
To: Canada |
From: Japan |
Year: 1965 |
|
Reason: Restoration of Great Lakes fisheries |
Reproducing: No | |
|
Comments: Attempted introduction failed. | ||
|
South and Central America | ||
|
To: Chile |
From: Japan |
Year: 1972-73 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Unknown |
|
Native range: Western seaboard U.S and Canada, Eastern seaboard Northern Asia
The kokanee or sockeye salmon has been widely distributed in the U.S. and Canada and, although few of these transplants were successful, permanent populations have been established in the Great Lakes. Attempts at introducing the species elsewhere have generally failed except in new Zealand where a freshwater population is established in one river system of South Island.
|
Asia | ||
|
To: India |
From: Japan |
Year: 1968 |
|
Reason: Angling |
Reproducing: No |
|
|
Europe | ||
|
To: Denmark |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1960, 1961 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: No |
|
|
To: Finland |
FTOB: U.S.A. |
Year: 1933 |
|
Reason: To fill a vacant niche |
Reproducing No | |
|
Comments: Disappeared. |
|
|
|
To: Sweden |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1959 |
|
Reason: To fill a vacant niche |
Reproducing: No | |
|
Oceania | ||
|
To: New Zealand |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Lakes and headwaters of Waitaki system, South Island. | ||
|
South and Central America | ||
|
To: Argentina |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1904+ |
|
Reason: To fill a vacant niche |
Reproducing: No | |
Native range: Fresh waters of South and C. Japan
This small freshwater salmon is important commercially in Japan. One introduction into the Federal republic of Germany was attempted unsuccessfully.
|
Europe | ||
|
To: Germany F.R. |
From: Japan |
Year: 1976 |
|
Reason: Angling |
Reproducing: Not known |
|
Native range: Western seaboard U.S. and Canada, Eastern seaboard Northern Asia
The chinook salmon was the first of the Pacific salmons to be introduced elsewhere and has since been the most extensively distributed. Populations have become established in the Great lakes in North America but the extensive attempts to introduce the species to Europe and South America have net with no success but one introduction, Chat into New Zealand has resulted in the species becoming established and is considered a valuable addition to the local fauna.
|
Europe | ||
|
To: Denmark |
From: Germany |
Year: 1897 |
|
Reason: New fishery |
Reproducing: No |
|
|
To: France |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: to fill a vacant niche |
Reproducing: No | |
|
To: Germany |
From: Unknown |
Year: 1890s |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: No |
|
|
To: Ireland |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: to fill a vacant niche |
Reproducing: No | |
|
To: Italy |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: to fill a vacant niche |
Reproducing: No | |
|
To: Netherlands |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1877 |
|
Reason: to fill a vacant niche |
Reproducing: No | |
|
Comments: Experimental introduction discontinued when the species failed to establish breeding populations (Groot, 1985). | ||
|
To: U.K. |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: to fill a vacant niche |
Reproducing: No | |
|
Oceania | ||
|
To: Australia |
From: New Zealand and U.S.A. | |
|
Year: 1877, 1967 |
Reason: To establish a new fishery | |
|
Reproducing: Artificially |
| |
|
Comments: Species has formed breeding populations in South Australia and Victoria, otherwise fisheries maintained with hatchery reared fish (MacKinnon, 1987). | ||
|
To: Hawaii |
From: California |
Year: 1876 |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: No |
|
|
Comments: (Maciolek, 1984) | ||
|
To: New Zealand |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1876/80,1901/7 |
|
Reason: New fishery and angling |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
Comments: Species now well established and abundant along the East coast of South Island. Regarded as an excellent species and a significant addition to New Zealand fauna (Hardy, 1972). | ||
|
South and Central America | ||
|
To: Argentina |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1904+ |
|
Reason: to fill a vacant niche |
Reproducing: No | |
|
Comments: Unsuccessful (Fuster de Plaza et al. 1954). | ||
|
To: Chile |
From: U.S.A. |
|
|
Year: 1900, 1924, 1930, 1975 |
| |
|
Reason: Establishment of wild stock |
Reproducing: Artificially | |
|
Comments: Early attempts to stock this species failed but efforts to introduce this species to Chile are continuing. | ||
|
To: Mexico |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: to fill a vacant niche |
Reproducing: No | |
|
To: Nicaragua |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: to fill a vacant niche |
Reproducing: No | |
Native range: China, Japan, Korea and Amur River basin
A small. Eastern Asian, riverine cyprinid which has been accidentally introduced into the Central Asian waters of Tashkent, U.S.S.R. along with shipments of Chinese carp fry.
|
Asia/Europe | ||
|
To: U.S.S.R. |
From: Yangtze R. China |
Year: 1961 |
|
Reason: Accidentally introduced with Chinese carp fry | ||
|
Reproducing: Yes | ||
|
Comments: Partially displaced local species in Tashkent where the species shows higher growth and fecundity than in its native habitat. | ||
Native range: East coast U.S.A. Maine to Virginia
This crayfish was one of the earliest introduced into Europe in an attempt to replace the Astacus astacus which was disappearing due to the crayfish plague caused by Aphanomyces astaci. The species spread throughput much of Northern Europe either by deliberate introduction or by diffusion. The American freshwater crayfish is not as highly appreciated as other species for its flesh but its high fecundity, disease resistance, and tolerance of deoxygenated and polluted waters have contributed to its rapid spread.
|
Europe | ||
|
To: Austria |
From: Germany F.R. |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Aquaculture and replacement of A. astacus in natural waters | ||
|
Reproducing: Yes | ||
|
To: France |
From: Unknown |
Year: Before 1925 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture and replacement of A. astacus in natural waters | ||
|
Reproducing: Yes | ||
|
Comments: The species was first recorded from the River Cher in 1925; Breeding populations are now found in the Seine, Loire and Rhone rivers and in Lakes Bourget and Nantua. | ||
|
To: Germany |
From: Unknown |
Year: 1890 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture and replacement of A. astacus in natural waters | ||
|
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
|
Comments: Widespread throughout country. | ||
|
To: Poland |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1900 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture and replacement of A. astacus in natural waters | ||
|
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
|
Comments: Widespread in North and South-west of the country. | ||
|
To: Switzerland |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: illegal introduction | ||
|
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
|
Comments: Breeding populations are established in Lake Geneva | ||
Native range: South Central Africa, Zambezi system
Oreochromis andersoni is one of the more important food fishes of the Zambezi river system. It has also been introduced in Southern Africa for pond culture. Despite its success in ponds in its native range the species has only been introduced to one other country.
|
Africa | ||
|
To: Tanzania |
From: Zambia |
Year: 1968 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Hybridized with local species (Moreau, 1979). | ||
Native range: Rivers Niger and Nile, Southern Israel
O. aureus is a popular species for aquaculture and has consequently been distributed widely especially in South and Central America where it is generally appreciated. It is resistant to high salinities and grows well under estuarine conditions. The species has frequently been mistaken for O. niloticus in introductions, studies and hybridization experiments. As a sub-tropical species this fish would be unable to breed in the natural waters of many of the temperate countries to which it has been introduced.
|
Africa | ||
|
To: South Africa |
From: Israel |
Year: 1976 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Uganda |
From: Israel |
Year: 1962 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Unknown |
|
|
Asia | ||
|
To: Philippines |
From: U.S.A., Singapore |
Year: 1977 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
Comments: Present in lakes and rivers. | ||
|
To: Singapore |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Not known | |
|
Comments: Presence of this species in Singapore can be deduced from its introduction to the Philippines. | ||
|
To: Taiwan, Prov. China |
From: Israel |
Year: 1974 |
|
Reason: Hybridization with O. niluoticus |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
Asia/Europe | ||
|
To: U.S.S.R |
From: Cuba |
Year: 1984 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Not known |
|
|
Comments: (Ivoylov, 1986). | ||
|
Europe | ||
|
To: Cyprus |
From: Israel |
Year: 1976 |
|
Reason: To fill a vacant niche |
Reproducing: No | |
|
Comments: Found flourishing self-breeding populations in the wild until 1979 when all were lost due to a winter kill. Stocking of dams repeated. | ||
|
North America | ||
|
To: U.S.A. |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Culture and weed control |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
Comments: Prolific and may affect local species (Shafland, 1978; Noble, 1980): Widespread in Texas, Florida and Arizona: Species is cultured in Alabama, Louisiana, South Carolina, Tennessee and may become established there. This species was initially mistaken for O. niloticus. | ||
|
South and Central America | ||
|
To: Brazil |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1965 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Costa Rica |
From: El Salvador |
Year: 1965 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Cuba |
From: Mexico |
Year: 1968 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture, forage, sport |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
Comments: An advantageous introduction. |
| |
|
To: El Salvador |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1963, 1979 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Guatemala |
From: El Salvador |
Year: 1974 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Mexico |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1964 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Nicaragua |
From: Costa Rica |
Year: 1978 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Panama |
From: Puerto Rico |
Year: 1987 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Peru |
From: Cuba |
Year: 1983 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Puerto Rico |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1972 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
Native range: L. Victoria
This species which was endemic to Lake Victoria and Lake Kyoga has now virtually disappeared from its native waters through overfishing, predation from Nile perch and competition or hybridization with introduced O. niloticus. Populations survive in several Tanzanian lakes where the species was introduced.
|
Africa | ||
|
To: Rwanda |
From: L. Victoria |
Year: 1950's |
|
Reason: Small lakes of Kagera system |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
Comments: Forms basis for fisheries in lakes from which suitable target species were absent. | ||
|
To: Tanzania |
From: L. Victoria |
Year: 1950's |
|
Reason: Vacant niche in small dams |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
Comments: Gave rise to valuable fisheries especially in L. Nyumba ya Mungu. Highly successful species for stocking into small dams where it fills a planktonophage niche. | ||
Native range: L. Albert, Uganda and Zaire
O. leucostictus is a relatively small tilapiine cichlid that is resistant to low dissolved oxygen tensions. It has been introduced to Lake Victoria where it occupied marginal lagoon habitats and to Lake Naivasha in Kenya where it hybridized with O. spilurus. It has also been used to stock dams in East Africa.
|
Africa | ||
|
To: Kenya |
From: L. Albert |
Year: 1954 |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Has established a stock in L. Naivasha and is present in Kenyan waters of L. Victoria. | ||
|
To: Tanzania |
From: L. Albert |
Year: 1954 |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Present in Tanzanian waters of L. Victoria. | ||
|
To: Zaire |
From: Uganda |
Year: 1955 |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Unknown |
|
|
Comments: Reported form Lualaba R. but success not sure (Moreau, 1979). | ||
Native range: Rivers of Zambezi basin, Lakes Mweru and Bangweulu
This species has been widely used for stocking ponds and dams in Southern Africa and in this way its native range has been extended northwards. The species has also been used for aquaculture and introduced into many African countries. Most records are for ponds and their is little documentation of the extent to which the species has become established in the wild. Its use outside of Africa has been very United.
|
Africa | ||
|
To: Algeria |
From: Zaire |
Year: 1961 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Benin |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Burundi |
From: Zaire |
Year: 1950's |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: |
|
|
To: Cameroon |
From: Congo |
Year: 1950's |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Central African Republic |
From: Zaire |
Year: 1953 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Unknown |
|
|
Comments: Attempts at culture with this species have been discontinued. | ||
|
To: Congo |
From: Zaire |
Year: 1953 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Ghana |
From: Kenya |
Year: 1962 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Ivory Coast |
From: Cameroon |
Year: 1958 |
|
Reason: Hybridization |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Kenya |
From: Zambia |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Madagascar |
From: Congo |
Year: 1955 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Used for aquaculture and fisheries at low altitudes. Declining because of competition with O. niloticus. | ||
|
To: Mauritius |
From: Madagascar |
Year: 1955 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Widespread and expanding. | ||
|
To: Rwanda |
From: Zaire |
Year: 1950's |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Zaire |
From: Zambia |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Oceania | ||
|
To: Hawaii |
From: Zaire |
Year: 1958 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Breeding populations established in reservoirs of Mauai and 'Oahu islands. | ||
Native range: Zambezi basin
O. mortimeri is very taxonomically BO close to O. mossambicus that some authorities consider it a sub-species of the latter. There are however colour differences between the two forms. There is some possibility that confusion between the two forms has occurred in stocking in some regions. Known international introductions of fish of the O. mortimeri type are limited to the use of the species for stocking dams in Zaire.
|
Africa | ||
|
To: Zaire |
From: Zambia |
Year: 1958 |
|
Reason: Stocking reservoirs |
Reproducing: Yes | |
Native range: Lower Zambezi and associated East African rivers
The earliest international movements of tilapiine cichlids were with this species. Since its appearance in Java in the 1930s, possibly through the escape of aquarium fish, the species has spread through deliberate introduction, diffusion or escape of pond fish until it has achieved pan-tropical status. Originally thought of as an ideal pond fish the readiness with which O. mossaabicus stunts has brought it into disrepute in most areas. Escapees have occupied natural waters where their prolificity and proneness to produce stunted stocks has gained them pest status. Nevertheless large quantities of the species are fished from estuaries, rivers, ponds, canals, ditches and rice paddles so its contribution is not wholly negative. The species is very hardy and resistant to high salinities even to the extent of occupying some/narine environments (Lobel, 1980). In aqua-culture O. mossambicus continues to be used in Asia as a major species but elsewhere it is mainly used for the production of monosex hybrids especially with O. niloticus (see 'red tilapia'). As a tropical species this fish would be unable to breed in the natural waters of many of the temperate countries to which it has been introduced.
|
Africa | ||
|
To: Algeria |
From: Unknown |
Year: 1961 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
To: Benin |
From: Unknown |
Year: 1980s |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Unknown |
|
|
Comment: This species was introduced into Lake Nokoué in Benin in an attempt to find a saline resistent species for aquaculture superior to the native Seratherodon melanotheron. It is not yet evident whether O. mossambicus will succeed in becoming established in the lake or how it will interact with local species. | ||
|
To: Egypt |
From: Thailand |
Year: 1954 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Madagascar |
From: Mozambique |
Year: 1956 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture, Rice fish culture |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
Comments: Some fisheries in rice fields and in wild but importance declining. | ||
|
To: South Africa |
From: Unknown |
Year: 1951 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Has occupied L. Sibaya (Moreau, 1979). | ||
|
To: Tunisia |
From: Zaire |
Year: 1966 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Unknown |
|
|
To: Uganda |
From: Zanzibar |
Year: 1962 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Asia | ||
|
To: Bangladesh |
From: Thailand |
Year: 1954 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Used throughout country but tends to disappear spontaneously. | ||
|
To: China |
From: Vietnam |
Year: 1957 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: introduced to Taiwan Province from Java in 1944: Widespread throughout Southern part of China in ponds and natural waters. | ||
|
To: Hong Kong |
From: Singapore, Thailand |
Year: 1940, 1948 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Widespread in ponds and reservoirs. | ||
|
To: India |
From: Thailand |
Year: 1952 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Widespread throughout country but not appreciated as its taste is poor, it stunts and competes with more popular local fishes. | ||
|
To: Indonesia |
From: Unknown |
Year: 1939 |
|
Reason: Possibly escape from aquaria |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
Comments: Species first appeared in Java before 1939; subsequently introduced: Sumatra, 1939; Lambok, 1941; Ball, 1943; Celebes, 1944; Banjak and Borneo (Kalimantan), 1950 and Moluccas, 1949: Now well established throughout archipelago. | ||
|
To: Japan |
From: Thailand |
Year: 1954 |
|
Reason: Unknown, assumed to be for aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
To: Korea |
From: Thailand |
Year: 1953 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Maintained in ponds as it frequently cannot withstand winter temperatures. | ||
|
To: Laos |
From: Thailand |
Year: 1955 |
|
Reason: Unknown, assumed |
to be for aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
To: Malaysia |
From: Indonesia |
Year: 1941-45 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: introduced into continental Malaysia in 1943, North Borneo (Sabah) in 1951 and Sarawak in 1960. Widespread in small water bodies and tin mining pools. Stunts and is not appreciated by local peoples. | ||
|
To: Pakistan |
From: Indonesia |
Year: 1951 |
|
Reason: Unknown, assumed to be for aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
To: Philippines |
From: Thailand |
Year: 1950 |
|
Reason: Unknown, assumed to be for aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
To: Singapore |
From: Indonesia |
Year: 1943 |
|
Reason: Unknown, assumed to be for aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
To: Sri Lanka |
From: East Africa |
Year: 1952 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Very important in reservoir fisheries. | ||
|
To: Thailand |
From: Malaysia |
Year: 1949 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Well established in 1950-60 but has now almost disappeared due to a spontaneous decline in population. | ||
|
To: Vietnam |
From: Philippines |
Year: 1955 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Asia/Europe | ||
|
To: U.S.S.R. |
From: Vietnam |
Year: 1962 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Not known | |
|
Comments: (Ivoylov, 1986). | ||
|
Europe | ||
|
To: Malta |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown, assumed to be for aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
To: U.K. |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Experimental biology |
Reproducing: Artificially | |
|
Middle East | ||
|
To: Israel |
From: Thailand |
Year: 1966 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
North America | ||
|
To: U.S.A. |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Accidental release from aquaria |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
Comments: Generally regarded as a pest: Established in Florida, North Carolina, Arizona, Idaho, California and possibly Alabama. Cultured in Georgia and Tennessee. | ||
|
Oceania | ||
|
To: American Samoa |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Australia |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Established in Queensland | ||
|
To: Cook Islands |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Fiji |
From: Philippines |
Year: 1955 |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Guam |
From: Philippines |
Year: 1955 |
|
Reason: Weed control |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Widespread. |
|
|
|
To: Hawaii |
From: Malaysia, Singapore |
Year: 1951 |
|
Reason: Bait fish/weed control |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
To: Kiribati |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Known from Line Islands and Gilbert Islands. | ||
|
To: Mariana Islands |
From: Philippines |
Year: 1955 |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Nauru |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: New Caledonia |
From: Fiji |
Year: 1955 |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Nine |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Papua New Guinea |
From: Malaysia |
Year: 1954 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture with accidental escape into natural waters | ||
|
Reproducing: Yes | ||
|
Comments: Very widespread; important as food fish especially in Sepik R. and Central Provinces. | ||
|
To: Solomon Islands |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Tahiti |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Tonga |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Vanuatu |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Wallis and Fortuna |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Western Samoa |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Unknown |
|
|
South and Central America | ||
|
To: Bolivia |
From: Brazil |
Year: 1983 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Brazil |
From: Unknown |
Year: 1960's |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Used in management of dams and reservoirs in the Northeast of the country where it makes a significant contribution to catches. | ||
|
To: Colombia |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1960 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Costa Rica |
From: Unknown |
Year: 1960+ |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Cuba |
From: Mexico |
Year: 1868, 1883 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture, forage, sport, mosquito control | ||
|
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
|
Comments: Positive introduction. | ||
|
To: Dominica |
From: St Lucia |
Year: 1950 |
|
Reason: Unknown, assumed to be for aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
To: Dominican Republic |
From: Haiti |
Year: 1953 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: El Salvador |
From: Guatemala |
Year: 1958 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Tilapias contribute over 50% of commercial catch. | ||
|
To: Grenada |
From: St Lucia |
Year: 1949 |
|
Reason: Unknown, assumed to be for aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
To: Guatemala |
From: El Salvador |
Year: 1955 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Guyana |
From: Haiti |
Year: 1951 |
|
Reason: Unknown, assumed to be for aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
To: Haiti |
From: Jamaica |
Year: 1951 |
|
Reason: Unknown, assumed to be for aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
To Honduras |
From: El Salvador |
Year: 1956 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Jamaica |
From: St Lucia |
Year: 1950 |
|
Reason: Unknown, assumed to be for aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
To: Martinique |
From: St Lucia |
Year: 1950 |
|
Reason: Unknown, assumed to be for aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
To: Mexico |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1964 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Nicaragua |
From: El Salvador |
Year: 1959 |
|
Reason: Unknown, assumed to be for aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
To: Panama |
From: Unknown |
Year: 1950 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Peru |
From: Panama |
Year: 1981 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Positive introduction. | ||
|
To: Puerto Rico |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1958 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: St Lucia |
From: Malaysia |
Year: 1949 |
|
Reason: Unknown, assumed to be for aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
To: Trinidad |
From: St Lucia |
Year: 1949 |
|
Reason: Unknown, assumed to be for aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
To: Venezuela |
From: Trinidad |
Year: 1958 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Should be used with care. | ||
Native range: River Nile, Chart basin and Southern Israel
Naturally the most widely distributed of the tilapiine cichlids O. niloticus is one of the most popular for culture and for stocking dams. It has less of a tendency to produce stunted populations and has good growth characteristics and taste, and for these reasons has been substituted for O. mossambicus in many regions. It is also widely used for producing mono-sex hybrids together with such species as O. mossambicus. It has been very extensively transported around the world and has achieved pan-tropical status. As a subtropical species this fish would be unable to breed in the natural waters of many of the temperate countries to which it has been introduced.
|
Africa | ||
|
To: Burundi |
From: Zaire |
Year: 1951 |
|
Reason: Capture fisheries |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
To: Cameroon |
From: Unknown |
Year: 1958 |
|
Reason: |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Replaced local species in Noum marsh. | ||
|
To: Central African Republic |
From: Congo |
Year: 1957 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Unknown |
|
|
To: Ivory Coast |
From: Upper Volta |
Year: 1957 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Widely introduced into reservoirs (Ayame, 196Z; Kossou, 1971) and many smaller water bodies. Appeared in rivers by diffusion. | ||
|
To: Madagascar |
From: Egypt |
Year: 1956 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture, stocking |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
Comments: Hybridized with other tilapias: Successful and important. | ||
|
To: Mauritius |
From: Madagascar |
Year: 1950 |
|
Reason: Sport |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Widespread and expanding. | ||
|
To: Reunion |
From: Madagascar |
Year: 1957 |
|
Reason: Sport |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Rwanda |
From: Zaire |
Year: 1951 |
|
Reason: Stocking |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: South Africa |
From: Israel |
Year: 1976 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Artificially | |
|
To: Tanzania |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Supplementary species |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
Comments: Hybridized with O. amphimelas: Has spread widely in Lake Victoria where it has possibly hybridized with O. esculentus. | ||
|
To: Tunisia |
From: Unknown |
Year: 1966 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Zaire |
From: C.Afr.Rep. |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Unknown |
|
|
Asia | ||
|
To: Bangladesh |
From: Thailand |
Year: 1974 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Widespread all over the country where it is regarded as an excellent food fish. | ||
|
To: China |
From: Africa |
Year: 1978 |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Established mainly in aquaculture ponds in Hubei province. introduced into Taiwan Province before 1969. | ||
|
To: Hong Kong |
From: Taiwan P., China |
Year: 1972 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Stunting and crossbreeding with other Oreochromis sp.: Widespread in fish ponds. | ||
|
To: Indonesia |
From: Taiwan |
Year: 1969 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture and stocking natural waters |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
To: Japan |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Experimental brackish water fish culture |
Reproducing: Unknown | |
|
To: Philippines |
From: Thailand, Israel |
Year: 1970, 1973 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Established in Laguna de Bay area. |
| |
|
To: Sri Lanka |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Common in certain reservoirs. | ||
|
To: Thailand |
From: Japan |
Year: 1965 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Widespread throughout country because of usefulness for aquaculture and stocking; tends to decline in abundance naturally after five years. | ||
|
To: Vietnam |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Widespread in lakes. | ||
|
Europe | ||
|
To: Belgium |
From: Israel |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Artificially |
|
|
Comments: Species fanned in heated power station cooling waters with production of 240 t (1986). | ||
|
To: Germany F.R. |
From: Ghana |
Year: 1957 |
|
Reason: Experimental aquaculture in cooling ponds | ||
|
Reproducing: Artificially | ||
|
South and Central America | ||
|
To: Bolivia |
From: Brazil |
Year: 1977 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Brazil |
From: Ivory Coast |
Year: 1971, 1972 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Positive introduction. | ||
|
To: Colombia |
From: Panama |
Year: 1980 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Positive introduction. | ||
|
To: Costa Rica |
From: Panama |
Year: 1979 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Cuba |
From: Peru |
Year: 1967 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture, forage, mosquito control |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
Comments: Positive introduction. |
| |
|
To: Dominican Republic |
From: Unknown |
Year: 1979 |
|
Reason: Fisheries and aquaculture |
Reproducing: Artificially | |
|
To: Ecuador |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Oreochromis sp. have become established in the Chone river where they have invaded the traditional 'chamera' fishery and compete with Dormitator latifrons reared there. | ||
|
To: El Salvador |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1979 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Tilapias contribute over 50% of commercial catch. | ||
|
To: Guatemala |
From: El Salvador |
Year: 1974 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Haiti |
From: Unknown |
Year: 1977, 1978 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Honduras |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1978 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Mexico |
From: Costa Rica |
Year: 1978 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Nicaragua |
From: El Salvador |
Year: 1964 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture and stocking reservoirs |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
To: Panama |
From: Brazil |
Year: 1976 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Very useful, rapid growth and excellent food value. | ||
|
To: Peru |
From: Brazil |
Year: 1979 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Puerto Rico |
From: Brazil |
Year: 1974 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
This hybrid apparently originated in Taiwan Province, China where it was developed as a cross between O. niloticus and an Asiatic strain of O. mossambicus. Hybrid individuals have been transported widely around Central and South America for experimental aquaculture.
|
Asia | ||
|
To: Indonesia |
From: Philippines |
Year: 1981 |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Artificially |
|
|
South and Central America | ||
|
To: Cuba |
From: Philippines |
Year: 1979 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Artificially maintained | |
|
Comments: Useful hybrid for mono-sex aquaculture. | ||
|
To: Dominican Republic |
From: Taiwan P. China |
Year: 1981 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Artificially maintained | |
|
To: Honduras |
From: Panama |
Year: 1978 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Artificially maintained | |
|
To: Panama |
From: Taiwan P. China |
Year: 1978 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Artificially maintained | |
Native range: Lake Malawi and Upper Shire R., Lake Chilwa
One sub-species of O. shiranus inhabits reedy lagoons and estuaries in the Lake Malawi basin the other is found in Lake Chilwa. The species has not generally been used for aqua-culture or for stocking of dams and only one unsuccessful international introduction has been this species using the L. Chilwa sub-species.
|
Africa | ||
|
To: Madagascar |
From: Malawi |
Year: 1969 |
|
Reason: Experimental Aquaculture |
Reproducing: No | |
Native range: Coastal rivers of Kenya and Somalia
This species has been stocked into farm dams throughout Kenya since 1922 and was introduced into Lake Naivasha in 1926. Three geographic sub-species and stocking with mixtures of these and with other Oreochromis species has resulted in extensive hybridization. Results of numerous introductions into other African countries are uncertain failing reports on the breeding status or use of the species.
|
Africa | ||
|
To: Benin |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Unknown |
|
|
Comment: This species was introduced into Lake Nokoué in an attempt to find a saline resistant species for aquaculture superior to the native Seracherodon melanotheron. It is not yet evident whether O. spilurus will become established in the lake or how it will interact with local species. | ||
|
To: Cameroon |
From: Kenya |
Year: 1950 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Unknown |
|
|
To: Congo |
From: Kenya |
Year: 1960's |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Unknown |
|
|
To: Egypt |
From: Kenya |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Unknown |
|
|
To: Ivory Coast |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Unknown |
|
|
Comment: This species was introduced into Lake Nokoué in an attempt to find a saline resistant species for aquaculture superior to the native Seratherodon melanotheron. It is not yet evident whether O. spilurus will become established in the lake or how it will interact with local species» | ||
|
To: Madagascar |
From: Kenya |
Year: 1950 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Unknown |
|
|
Comments: Disappeared. |
|
|
|
To: Mozambique |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Unknown |
|
|
Comments: (Jhingran and Gopalakrishnan, 1979). | ||
|
To: Uganda |
From: Kenya |
Year: 1962 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Introduced to Lake Bunyoni before 1958 but this stocking was unsuccessful. Otherwise stocked into dams elsewhere in the country. | ||
|
To: Zaire |
From: Kenya |
Year: 1950's |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
Native range: Rufigi river system, Tanzania and R. Wami in Zanzibar
This species exists in two forms O. urolepis urolepis and O. urolepis hornorum. The latter from, under the name O. hornorum has been widely introduced for production of hybrids especially in South and Central America. There have been a number of escapes into the wild and the species, or hybrids of it, have become established in many natural water bodies.
|
Africa | ||
|
To: Ivory Coast |
From: Malaysia |
Year: 1967 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Asia | ||
|
To: Sri Lanka |
From: East Africa |
Year: 1969 |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Artificially | |
|
South and Central America | ||
|
To: Brazil |
From: Ivory Coast |
Year: 1971, 1972 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: A positive introduction. | ||
|
To: Colombia |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Costa Rica |
From: Unknown |
Year: 1960+ |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Cuba From: Mexico/Nicaragua |
Year: 1976, 1983 | |
|
Reason: Aquaculture, forage, sport |
Reproducing: Yes | |
|
Comments: Positive introduction. |
| |
|
To: Dominican Republic |
From: Panama Year: 1980 | |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Artificially | |
|
To: El Salvador |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1979 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Tilapias contribute over 50% of commercial catch. | ||
|
To: Guatemala |
From: El Salvador |
Year: 1974 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Honduras |
From: Panama |
Year: 1979 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Mexico |
From: Costa Rica |
Year: 1978 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Nicaragua |
From: El Salvador |
Year: 1974 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Òî: Panama |
From: Brazil |
Year: 1976 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Undesirable in natural waters. | ||
|
To: Peru |
From: Brazil/Panama |
Year: 1978, 1980 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
To: Puerto Rico |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1963 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Oceania | ||
|
To: Australia |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Artificially | |
|
To: Fiji |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
Native range: Sacramento River, California, U.S.A.
This highly localized species has been introduced into other river basins in California and into Nevada. One international introduction is recorded.
|
Asia |
||
|
To: China |
From: U.S.A. |
Year: 1982 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Unknown |
|
Native range: Japan, Korea, Eastern China and Eastern Khazakstan
The Japanese rice fish has had along history as an aquarium fish species and as a laboratory experimental animal it has been widely transported around the world for the aquarium fish trade and has been released accidentally in at least two localities. It has been used for mosquito control in Cuba.
|
North America | ||
|
To: U.S.A. |
From: Japan |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Accidental release from aquaria |
Reproducing: Unknown | |
|
Comments: Originally established in California but has since disappeared (Courtenay and Hensley, 1980). | ||
|
Oceania | ||
|
To: Hawaii |
From: Asia |
Year: 1922 |
|
Reason: Ornament |
Reproducing: No |
|
|
Comments: Not established |
|
|
|
South and Central America | ||
|
To: Cuba |
From: U.S.S.R. |
Year: 1976 |
|
Reason: Mosquito control |
|
Reproducing: Yes |
Native range: Greater Sunda Islands
A large species of mainly vegetarian habit the gourami reaches a substantial size (60 ñòà) and is resistant to both low dissolved oxygen concentrations in the water and to brackish water. The species is used for aquaculture throughout its native range and has been introduced into several other countries for that purpose.
|
Africa | ||
|
To: Ivory Coast |
From: Singapore |
Year: 1957 |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Unknown |
|
|
To: Madagascar |
From: Mauritius |
Year: 1857 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Fisheries in Pangalanes. | ||
|
To: Mauritius |
From: Indonesia |
Year: 1951 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Widespread but being replaced by tilapias. | ||
|
Asia | ||
|
To: India |
From: Java |
Year: 1916 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Established in Tamil Nadu; of limited use (Vooren, 1968). | ||
|
To: Philippines |
From: Java |
Year: 1927 |
|
Reason: Aquaculture |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: Slow growth limits usefulness. | ||
|
To: Sri Lanka |
From: Indonesia |
Year: 1939 |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
Comments: No longer important as a food fish. | ||
|
To: Thailand |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Unknown |
|
|
Oceania | ||
|
To: Hawaii |
From: Philippines |
Year: 1950 |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: No |
|
|
Comments: Introduction unsuccessful | ||
|
To: New Caledonia |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Unknown |
Reproducing: Yes |
|
|
South and Central America | ||
|
To: Colombia |
From: Unknown |
Year: Unknown |
|
Reason: Accidental escape of ornamental fish |
Reproducing: Yes | |
